Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

The Kennedys Caucus

By Chris Suellentrop January 29, 2008 9:42 amJanuary 29, 2008 9:42 am

What would Sargent Shriver do? The 2008 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination is turning into an internecine Kennedy free-for-all. After Caroline Kennedy and Ted Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama, three of Robert F. Kennedy’s children – RFK Jr., Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and Kerry Kennedy – take to the op-ed page of The Los Angeles Times to explain why they support Hillary Clinton. They write:

While talk of unity and compromise are inspiring to a nation wary of divisiveness, America stands at a historic crossroads where real issues divide our political landscapes. Democrats believe that America should not be torturing people, eavesdropping on our citizens or imprisoning them without habeas corpus or other constitutional rights. We should not be an imperial power. We need healthcare for all and a clean, safe environment.

The loftiest poetry will not solve these issues. We need a president willing to engage in a fistfight to safeguard and restore our national virtues.

It is reassuring to learn that not all the Kennedys have succumbed to the magic of Barack Obama. The times we are in cry out for seasoned leadership less reliant on emotions and poetry, more reliant on reason and the ability to sacrifice in order to improve the world. Bill Clinton must learn from the experiences of the past month that no one wants him back for a third term nor do the American people want or need a co-presidency. If President Clinton can suppress his urges to be a major player, Hillary Clinton will capture the nomination and win the presidency.

We’ve tried fistfights. Since when are unity, compromise, and looking for a way to transcend divisions bad ways to move forward? Can these three truly see no way forward for the country other than a fistfight, and they’re choosing the person most willing to brawl?

As for this, “Democrats believe that America should not be torturing people, eavesdropping on our citizens or imprisoning them without habeus corpus or other constitutional rights,” why do the last two points apply only to citizens? Torture is a very important issue for me, and Obama has been much more vocally opposed, and in clear language, than Clinton. If a Clinton supporter would like to point to her clear denunciation of torture, plans for Guantanamo, etc, I’d appreciate it; my searches turn up little other than the wishy washy stuff I get from all the Republicans save McCain.

Caroline is the only Kennedy I’m really admiring these days. Most have lost all integrity by opposing the Cape Wind alternative energy project. I think our enormous oil consumption is one of the most important problems we face and Obama is likeliest to take big steps to address it.

I am mystified by these endorsements. The only political speaker who ever brought me to tears besides Obama was RFK Jr. in 2006. In his speech, he pointed out that the Republicans were 95% corrupt, while the Democrats were only 70% corrupt. And RFK is of course an inspiring environmentalist.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager is the President of Burson Marsteller, a company that makes Massey Coal and Exxon Mobil look like good guys. BM represents cigarette, armament, and fossil fuel companies, concentrating on distorting their records and creating doubt in the public’s mind. It doesn’t get worse than that.

The RFK kids said in their Clinton endorsement that we can’t have leadership that tolerates torture. Didn’t they notice Hillary’s waffling on the Mukasey confirmation?

I’m confused. I think all the Kennedys read the paper. Something is going on here that is beyond me.

It is refreshing to see that Robert F. Kennedy’s care more about what is right for this country than Ted Kennedy’s desire to maintain his family as the only political dynasty. Ted Kennedy should remember that the most important legislation he ever got through Congress, health care for our children, was made possible because of Hillary Clinton. Not because of “inspiring words” from Obama.

“The loftiest poetry will not solve these issues”.Trust Bobby Kennedy’s family to get it right.Idealism is fine in the right circumstances.These are not the right circumstances.These young Kennedys are right.In this time of crisis we truly need a fighter who knows how to get the job done.Hillary Clinton is a no nonsense,get the job done fighter.We need her leadership ability and tough,intelligence to see us through.There is a time to be nice and a time to be serious.It is way past time to be nice.The other party does not want to work with us to restore our country to its former standing in the world.They want their way or the highway.We have seen this for the past eight years.Obamma may have the best of intentions but it is not logical to think he can just announce that everything is going to be rosy and therefore it is.It is going to take hard work by a lot of people who know exactly what they are doing.Leadership and experience are crucial in this endeavor.Hillary Clinton has these qualities in abundance.Voters need to use some good old common sense in this instance.Nice will not cut it with the Republicans in congress.We cannot continue in this disasterous habit of capitulation in the house and senate.

“We need a president willing to engage in a fistfight to safeguard and restore our national virtues.”

No, we do not need fist fights. Fist fight will cause divisiveness. Our national virtues can be restored only if we all work together and not by fist fights. Further, a leader who will not compromise will not succeed in convincing the Congress and the Senate to pass important bills.

Therefore, we need an effective leader like Barack Obama who can work across the aisle and help pass important bills in the Congress and the Senate. We need someone who can unite us after 16 years of bitter polarization.

“She has worked for peace in Northern Ireland and fought to bridge religious, racial and ethnic divides from Bosnia to the Middle East to South Africa.”

That may have been the case in some places, but the recent race, religion, and gender issues injected into the primaries by her, her husband, and her top advisors clearly state otherwise. She is insincere and will do and say anything to win.

I can not understand how the family of a man of peace like RFK, while admitting the nation is wary of divisiveness, feel the best way to address that very divisiveness is to “engage in a fist-fight”. The extraordinary response that Sen. Obama has received from Democrats and Republicans show that the nation is ready to move on. After reading the entire op-ed in the LAT, it is almost as though Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Kerry Kennedy have a score to settle and they come across as all too pleased to employ the Clintonian “end justifies means” brand of politics to settle that score. Their endorsement left me sad and disappointed.

I am inclined to agree. If Obama can’t take a little heat from Bill, how is he going to hold up against the swift boat attacks in the general election and organized republican opposition in Washington. They will not lay down their arms and come along on his non-partisan walk of hope.

There’s something misguided in the statement that “we” want a president willing to engage in a fistfight to safeguard our national virtues. I thought we wanted a president to be above the fight ring of politics. Unfortunately, Hillary/Bill Clinton have shown themselves to be only too willing to engage in a fistfight to get their own way. It presents two immature people who have a sense of entitlement — and god help anyone who gets in their way.

If this is supposed to win support for the plural Clintons, I think it backfired.

Strange that Bobby Kennedy’s children do not support Obama, the candidate who resembles their father in his passionate humanitarian zeal and his uplifting call for more than entrenched partisan ideals.

It’s bears noting that RFK Jr. is about as far from a centrist political hack as a person can get. This endorsement should cause those on the far left who have made a religion of Obama think twice (or for that matter even once) about who can realistically achieve change.

When it came to the most important vote in her career, a vote of historic lfe and death magnitude, Hillary voted to give Bush the authority to preempt war in Iraq. Now after nearly 4,000 American lives have been lost, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead and 2 trillion dollars spent, she says no one can know the future. But it was not a wrong decision based on predicting the future, it was a wrong decision based on not being able to clearly view the present. She did not understand the “urgency of now”. There was no evidence of WMD or an Iraq/Al Qaeda connection. She made her decision because she was all wrapped up in the feelings and fears of the public and the political correctness of materializing an enemy to fight for the moment. All the policy wonking wonders in the world, cannot bring back the lives that have been lost. She has shown us that the kind of experience she has does not necessarily make for good leadership. Vote O. When others were swept up in the politics of the moment, he really had the coolness to see the situation as it truly was. Do you want to hear Hill unapologetically say for four more years “If I knew then what I know now?”. There is a reason she is trying to dirty up Obama’s stand on the Iraqi war, it is because there really is no excuse for a leader to botch it up at a crucial moment as badly as she did. Vote O. Lets not be fooled by someone who claims competence even after making the biggest error of our time, and then tries to vindicate herself by lying about someone else’s good record. Let’s embrace Obama. He did not make that mistake. Let’s move forward.

That was not an endorsement, that was a canonization. It is difficult to support a candidate who will not be questioned by reporters or anyone else. If you ask about anything to do with Mr. Obama’s policies and opinions on issues you are immediately told you are playing the race card or dropping code words. Someone please tell me what the code words are because not one pundit or “journalist” has yet to say what they are. They simply say so and so has uttered the code word or played the race card.

George: What is Mr. Obama’s stance on prime mortage rates?
Mary: What are you implying? You are just like those others who a dropping the race card and using code words.
George: What code word?
Mary: You know what you said.
George: What did I say?
Mary: And the race card; I never thought you would do that to me, George.
George: Mary, you know I love you. Please. Don’t turn away from me….

Are we all clueless in America…The Russians are coming, The Russians are coming. PS I’m in Florida and I’m a Democrat and I’m going to vote anyway the pundit class and the DNC say my vote doesn’t count.
Orange juice

I think that having the Ted Kennedy Obama endorsement following Kerry and Bill Bradley is a windfall for Senator Clinton if she can now secure the nomination. It allows her to jettison the old guard Democratic party that has not been able to elect a president or run a successful national campaign and get onto the business of building an electoral coalition to get into the White House. If she can secure the nomination based on the voting of the rank and file democrats, then she is well positioned for the national presidential campaign this fall. Many of the core democratic party elites do not resonate with most of the country and a rank and file nomination from the party would have more support than the “deigned” nominee.

I cant believe the message board I’m reading! Bill Clinton was and remains a sucessful two-term president. I see nothing wrong with his defense of his own legacy and his wife (remember Bill was just defending what Barak was stating inn his speeches). Just because Obama is an attractive “black candidate” does NOT a president make. RFK’s children had it right, we need a president who can start right away not someone on a learning curve.

It is heartening that members of the Kennedy family have spoken out and endorsed Senator Clinton. What is truly discouraging is press coverage. The press has not given attention to these important endorsements as it has to Senator Obama’s.

The role of the press in this election cannot be overlooked as it was in our past contested elections.

Reporting on Senator Clinton’s campaign since South Carolina has been unduly rough as covered by the press. This does not reflect on either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama–it only shows us how our press continues to present events and individuals that sell.

Senator Ted Kennedy, et. al., have told us that Senator Obama’s gift to inspire and unite will serve and lead us and our country better than tested and proven, dedicated and successful experience. His presence as well as his words call up a more idealistic and idealized past.

I was one of those high school students inspired to a life of service by John F. Kennedy. It influenced the course of my life, my thinking, my high ideals in ways that I could never have imagined when I was 16. However, having lived that life and its consequences, I know without a doubt how vital it is to have the skills, the know-how, and the networks and connections to carry that vision into successful reality. Most women who have come of age in the past 30 years have learned and earned these lessons, like Senator Clinton, through going out, doing, and achieving.

I am writing here to call upon the press to practice due diligence–to give us equitable and fair coverage of all candidates. I am asking for unbiased reporting. Then, allow each of us to vote our minds, our hearts, and our consciences. If we are not to repeat the heinous errors of the last two presidential elections, we need a responsible and unbiased press.